Many manual testers are pivoting to test automation with the changing times, and have a general tendency to start this journey with some knowledge of coding. Coding is an innate trait, which clearly states that some people can code and some cannot. It is good to know it sooner than later. Below are some of the differences between Manual vs Automatic testing and understand its scope.
- Manual testers depend on each other to make a task simpler and test the application. It is a sort of chain format in which one tester creates the data and the next test it.
- The tester continues testing even if the first test case is left in an invalid state.
- A manual test takes different time to perform specific actions and can stop the test whenever required.
- Manual testers if required can set and reset dates and travel to specific date and time.
- In automated testing, independent test cases are written so that they don't have to be executed together every time, which can lead to the same test suites to run everything. For example, to run a smoke test with the currently changed features.
- Cleanup takes place automatically after completion so that the next test case can be executed from scratch.
- Automated testing can also test one feature at a time, which makes it easier to verify the results and consider the failure points of a specific element.
- The automated testing result can only be seen after the testing is completed. It provides a detailed log on whatever things were run and caused errors.
- Automated testing can be very beneficial for project managers to present how many tests were executed and how many failed. For the developers, the issues to be fixed are can be viewed with more detailed log and in clearly distributed lists.
- Test engineer then can solve the issues directly in the automation scripts.
Reuse data whenever required
While the system under test (SUT) is active, instead of moving to the next module and losing synchronization, you can seamlessly work on other modules.
Perform date sensitive test cases
Automated testing doesn't require to start everything from scratch again and again. A tiny change can help you to make multiple test changes. For instance, if any actions are performed in many test cases, each module has a specific script which can be edited whenever required.
There is space for both Manual Testing and automated testing in the industry, and it has it own pros and cons. Automated testing killing manual testing is hype, and still requires human intervention to complete the entire testing process. Automation Testing can always complement manual testing to decrease the workload. For any organization, the key is to evaluate and balance the two methods continuously. Some of the critical factors to decide between automation, manual, or both are:
Repeatability is a prime factor which drives automation v/s manual testing decision. Though automation testing is no magic, it requires specific skill sets, resources, time, tools, budget, and understanding stakeholder's perspective. If there is is a great return on investment in so many resources, then definitely you should use the automated testing scripts.
2. Cost & Benefit Analysis
Automation testing frameworks, tools, resources and training the employees contribute directly to the project cost. As a project manager or test lead, you will have to weigh the additional costs against the possible returns. Just upgrading to Automation Testing without understanding the area can hurt the overall project.
3. Project Type
Project type is an important indicator of testing what kind of automation you should continue using. It is best to validate the size, scale, and type of project in terms of data approach, and device involvement as well. Manual testing is cheaper; it requires more time. If there is a large project and too many testers have to work on frontend and backend, a potential blend of automation and manual testing can fetch you better results.
4. Value Addition
A project manager or test manager needs to understand that spending on automation adds value to the project and saves time and effort. The value should be defined in terms of uncovering additional bugs, total time taken of testing, the comfort level of manual testers and developers, a quicker turnaround time to retest, uncovering issues in lesser time, and fewer resources required to make manual testers life simpler. A collaborative approach between automated scripts and manual testers can be tested for a monotonous task.
Testing requires a mindset that looks at the system at large and understands the overall objective and purpose of the system under test. Manual testing needs a perspective to understand the type of users and make simulations to test user behavior regarding the software. While automation testing cannot take over manual testing, however, the implementation and execution are much more seamless in automation.
For larger projects, automation is effective and cost-friendly in terms of implementation, which caters to multiple objective scenarios. It is a wise decision to choose automation which can quantify the experience and quality, which are backed up by facts and figures. For qualitative factors, organizations will continue to have a manual testing approach.
Contact us for Automation Services, As our testing team of test engineers and Quality Assurance experts strictly adhere to test case and use their intuitive approaches to find hidden defects, improvisations, and solutions in the least turnaround time.